***Official*** Australia in South Africa

[jondavluc]

I think this game could have pretty much ensured a spot in the XI for North in the first test, 50's in both the innings, and six wickets to go with it, if he doesn't get picked after that, then he should consider himself very unlucky.

All in all, this game proved to be a very good workout for the Aussie boys, almost every batsman made some runs and spent some time out there in the middle, and the bowlers too seemed to have gotten themselves into better rhythm as the game progressed.

Obviously Clarke' availability is still a worry, and has it been revealed why McGain and Siddle didn't bowl in the 2nd innings, because it makes no sense for them not to bowl and get some valuable practice under the belt, unless of course they are struggling with an injury or something

EDIT: Never mind... just read about it.

Yeah they are sick.

Cricinfo - North boosts Test prospects in draw

 

[aussie]

I have not seen Marcus North of course. But regardless of this performance do you Australians think he is off-spinners is good enough for him to a decent defensive option in test. Thus allowing the 4 quicks to play?? (Since 3 quicks plus McGain is too risky)

 

[social]

Cotchefstroom

Good to see the truth still hits home

 

[Nate]

I have not seen Marcus North of course. But regardless of this performance do you Australians think he is off-spinners is good enough for him to a decent defensive option in test. Thus allowing the 4 quicks to play?? (Since 3 quicks plus McGain is too risky)

Why is McGain too risky?

As much as I personally don't rate McGain, anything other than

Phil Hughes
Simon Katich
Ricky Ponting
Michael Hussey
Michael Clarke
Marcus North
Brad Haddin
Mitchell Johnson
Peter Siddle
Bryce McGain
Doug Bollinger

would be pretty silly imo. Have posted this same line-up since the middle of the summer aswell.

 

[stephen]

Why is McGain too risky?

As much as I personally don't rate McGain, anything other than

Phil Hughes
Simon Katich
Ricky Ponting
Michael Hussey
Michael Clarke
Marcus North
Brad Haddin
Mitchell Johnson
Peter Siddle
Bryce McGain
Doug Bollinger

would be pretty silly imo. Have posted this same line-up since the middle of the summer aswell.

Well TBF you normally have Bracken in the lineup.

 

[howardj]

You pick a team for five days of the Test match - not the first innings, and definitely not on the off chance that you win the toss and bowl first. Therefore, to go with four quicks and not include a frontline spinner is madness I reckon.

Thus, with McGain in the team, the fifth bowler, especially at Johannesburg, should probably be a seam-up merchant. = Macca.

These I think should be the two principles that guide the selectors for the first test.

 

[howardj]

Predictions

Series Result: South Africa 2-1
Top SA Runscorer: Kallis
Top Aus Runscorer: Hussey
Top SA Wicket-taker Steyn
Top Aus Wicket-taker Johnson
Player of the Series: Steyn
Surprise Packet Hughes
Dropped Player(s): McGain, Bollinger, McKenzie
Miscellaneous Event: Clarke to be sent home with a sore back

 

[Nate]

Well TBF you normally have Bracken in the lineup.

Still would, point being that's the team from the people who have a remote chance of playing.

 

[Simon]

I'll say

Series Result: Draw 1-1
Top SA Runscorer: AB De Villiers
Top Aus Runscorer: Simon Katich
Top SA Wicket-taker: Dale Steyn
Top Aus Wicket-taker: Peter Siddle
Player of the Series: Dale Steyn
Surprise Packet: Bryce McGain
Dropped Player(s): One of the SA bowlers will make way for Tsotsobe at some stage
Miscellaneous Event: Australia will use the same 11 for each of the tests

 

[NUFAN]

Series Result: Australia 2-1
Top SA Runscorer: H. Amla
Top Aus Runscorer: R. Ponting
Top SA Wicket-taker: M. Morkel
Top Aus Wicket-taker: P. Siddle
Player of the Series: R. Ponting
Surprise Packet: M. Morkel and M. North
Dropped Player(s): Not sure, however, I'll go for D. Bollinger and surprisngly JP Duminy with Prince his replacement.
Miscellaneous Event: Titty flash on TV, hopefully not Siddle's.

 

[Uppercut]

You pick a team for five days of the Test match - not the first innings, and definitely not on the off chance that you win the toss and bowl first. Therefore, to go with four quicks and not include a frontline spinner is madness I reckon.

Thus, with McGain in the team, the fifth bowler, especially at Johannesburg, should probably be a seam-up merchant. = Macca.

These I think should be the two principles that guide the selectors for the first test.

PEWS did some interesting analysis not long back- as it turns out, fast bowling is still quite a bit more effective than spin bowling in the third and fourth innings.

 

[aussie]

Why is McGain too risky?

As much as I personally don't rate McGain, anything other than

Phil Hughes
Simon Katich
Ricky Ponting
Michael Hussey
Michael Clarke
Marcus North
Brad Haddin
Mitchell Johnson
Peter Siddle
Bryce McGain
Doug Bollinger

would be pretty silly imo. Have posted this same line-up since the middle of the summer aswell.

Picking McGain as part of 4-man attack is risky because the likely 3 seamers aren't a McGrath/Gillespie/Kasper like combo in ability.

All are obviously inexperienced, along with McGain who aint nor Warne or MacGill. So picking such an attack, Australia are definately at a disadvantage to SA batsmen. Its going to another repeat of the home series, since thats not learning from the mistakes that where made with the bowling selections.

I have said it many times, but 4-seamers is the best balance for the 1st test. I'd love to see McGain start, but overall its not the best option.

If After the 1st test though, as Ponting wisely said the other day. The quicks step up like how McGrath, Reifell, Juilian stepped up in 95 & surprise the saffies, then throw McGain into the action.

 

[Burgey]

Picking McGain as part of 4-man attack is risky because the likely 3 seamers aren't a McGrath/Gillespie/Kasper like combo in ability.

All are obviously inexperienced, along with McGain who aint nor Warne or MacGill. So picking such an attack, Australia are definately at a disadvantage to SA batsmen. Its going to another repeat of the home series, since thats not learning from the mistakes that where made with the bowling selections.

I have said it many times, but 4-seamers is the best balance for the 1st test. I'd love to see McGain start, but overall its not the best option.

If After the 1st test though, as Ponting wisely said the other day. The quicks step up like how McGrath, Reifell, Juilian stepped up in 95 & surprise the saffies, then throw McGain into the action.

I gather what you're saying, then, is that McGain's selection is, to an extent, tied to McDonald's. If they play McDonald, would you be more inclined to pick McGain?

I don't think it's an easy question for the selectors. North would appear more likely to score runs than McDonald, but McDonald more likely to take wickets than North, despite the latter's 6-for in the tour match. And I wouldn't have thought even North would consider himself a front-line spinner.

As much as I'd think North would be perhaps more likely to play medium-to-long-term at number 6 for Australia than McDonald, in this instance, wouldn't the more attacking move be to play McDonald as part of a five man attack?

It seems to me that playing a 6th specialist batsman and a four man attack in circumstances where we've struggled to knock SA over at home, let alone away, is basically telling the opposition we'd be content to draw the first test rather than have a crack.

 

[Hoggy31]

Meh, all this is irrelevant. You play your 6 best batsmen and 4 best bowlers. If Bollinger, Siddle and Johnson can't get the job done then what's Ronnie gonna do. North has to play in front of McDonald, and I'm fairly surprised another batsman hasn't been called up to cover for Clarke - North and McDonald both in the middle order could be dangerous.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

Meh, all this is irrelevant. You play your 6 best batsmen and 4 best bowlers.

Yeah, but it's not going to happen.

 

[inbox24]

Hey guys, does anyone think Hughes looks like a southpaw Michael Clarke batting stance?

 

[Burgey]

Hey guys, does anyone think Hughes looks like a southpaw Michael Clarke batting stance?

Can certainly see it in that shot, but in terms of stance, set up, etc., I really don't think he's much like him.

Edit: hope he bats like Clarke has for the past year or so

 

[Nate]

He defo does in that pic, but not IRL.

 

[Redbacks]

That pic looks like a mirror image of M.Clarke

 

[Julian87]

Well D'acosta has had a lot to do with the both of them.